Summary on Euthyphro's Dialogue
Socrates goes to the court to seek advice from Euthyphro on an indictment by a young man by the name Meletus, who claims that he knows by whom and how the young are corrupted. So by that he refers to Socrates as the one corrupting the young by fabricating the gods of which Socrates knows nothing about because according to him, what he taught was the mere truth which he says the Athenians dislike because he is trying to win people in his own way of thinking.
It is at this point that Ethyphro tells Socrates about the dilemma in his own case which involves prosecuting his own further for committing unintentional murder on a servant. The dilemma comes as a result of considering prosecuting a relative and according to the law, unlike when you are handling a stranger (Plato and William, p.4). Then what Socrates asks Ethyphro is if he will consider what is holy and unholy to fearlessly prosecute is own dad. Of which Ethyphro clears that he would follow what is in knowledge of all the people.
Socrates then puts Ethyphro into a contest of what is righteous and unrighteous, regarding the case of his father. He regards that holiness consists of one thing and unholiness is the opposite of holiness that always appears in one form. Ethyphro then says that holiness is prosecuting the wrongdoers regardless of the crime or the relation to the crime and that being unholy is not prosecuting. He also utters that it is not good to give way to the ungodly whoever they may seem to be.
Then Socrates portrays about his shortcomings in the legal field because he does not accept what people say about the gods. Ethyphro tells Socrates that what the gods love is holy and that what they do not love is unholy. However, Socrates does not believe that if this is true because the gods have their likes and dislikes and that they (gods) do holy and unholy things. He also says that the gods get into arguments like human beings and regard things to be ugly, just, beautiful, good and bad, which cause disputes and which they usually try to finds solutions to. Socrates also regards that these same things are said to be holy and unholy by the people yet they are godly.
Then Ethyphro says that there is no any god who will dispute about a wrongdoer being punished. Of which Socrates concurs with. However, Ethyphro says that people always try to want some leniency on the wrongdoers and that they should go unpunished depending on who they are, what they did and when. Of which the gods have the same experience among them.
Socrates yet brings another thing which is on dispute and says that there are those things being carried and the carrier, something guided and the guide, then the seen and the one who see it. Of which he concludes that there is are those loved and those who love and questions if the two are not the same. Then his remarks are that effects do not occur because things undergo effects but those effects occur because of a certain cause (Patterson and Charles, p.16).
Socrates also tells Ethyphro that the same way the gods provide unto us is the same way they receive from us and that we sacrifice what is good to them and expect to get the same from them. There is no point of being afraid to do what is godly, and that is what is holy, despite the outcome. Then the two friends part ways.
Patterson, Charles H. Plato's Euthyphro, Apology, Crito & Phaedo: Notes. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002. Print.
Plato, and William A. Heidel. Plato's Euthyphro: With Introduction and Notes and Pseudo-Platonica. New York: Arno Press, 1976. Print.